Lord Of Ruin wrote:There are functional limits to how many lanes can effectively be operated before order and safety breaks down. Multiply that by the same issue being a concern at Greeters, at Gate, and finding plots in the dark in the city.

in other words....you're drinking from the hose and are real thirsty. One way to get hydrated fast is for me to turn up the hose. Another way is for me to give you a larger diameter hose (more lanes) at the same pressure. A third is to add a larger diameter hose AND more pressure. But now you've got another problem looming...how quickly can you swallow all the water without vomiting it back up? (that's the city itself.)

For the record, Gate runs 8 set lanes, and we have the ability to add up to another 4 realistically in crunch times. That extra space is usually used to accommodate issues like breakdowns, emergencies, etc The 8 lanes are typically running multiple crews in each lane; typically 4 vehicles more or less get searched and processed and released in a batch. Next four...

Yup, doing the batches is one of the good techniques. It wasn't always there though it's been with the gate for a while.

Bradtem, you keep mentioning other events. Can you cite an event that searches all vehicles, must take individual tickets, is a camping/living space event, and lets the participants choose their own space to set up in....and that does it all much better than BM? Did you know other festival send people to BM to find out how to fix their issues by copying some of our methods?

No event has a situation quite like BM, I agree. Most are getting people to parking lots, and then handle ticket processing after people are out of cars, which is much simpler. That being said, they are then able to handle vastly higher volumes than BM. I mean a football stadium can get 50,000 fans parked and in over an hour. I realize it's not the same problem as 20,000 cars. But to be clear, I was not saying that other people do what Burning Man does, but rather that in other environments where long lines develop, be they events, airport security, concerts etc. solutions are found.

That said, Great Smokey Mountains takes 45,000 visitors on the average single day in June, what BRC handles in a week. With an average of 17K/day at the Gaitlinberg entrance. And of course higher than that 45,000 on the weekend days. Of course that is easier because that park is free. Grand Canyon is not free -- they are collecting cash at the gate and handing 21,000 day average in the peak months, I don't know what the peak day is. Only a quarter stay overnight. They don't feel the need to search. Stadia do search, at least some of them, but it's on foot.

If you want to see places where vehicles are searched all the time going into places as mundane as a shopping mall, Israel is the place to go. Personally I don't know how they live with it, but they are used to it, and they're also very good at it so they make the traffic flow.

I'm curious..what are those other better run events that hae solved the problem? Maybe a handful of us can go there and glean some hints.

Wanna know how simple it would be to cut the processing time/line in half, at least from a Gate standpoint?

[list=]All vehicles must have all spaces within them able to be reached by an arms length...let's say 30". If any part of the vehicle is not reachable by a person easily getting that close, the entire vehicle is turned back to Reno to remedy. Anybody that's processed through in a car or small SUV will attest to how fast that is.

All vehicles hold up tickets as they get to the sorting kiosk. No tickets in evidence, they're routed down the loopback down the highway. Go fix it somewhere else.

Move willcall/boxoffice into Gerlach, Nixon or Reno. Anywhere but the event.

All drivers must remain within the vehicle once they leave the highway. Turnoffs/loopbacks to the highway will be placed along Gate road. If you exit your vehicle, your vehicle will be sent back down the highway to try again.

All vehicles must stay within their initial lane until they reach the sorting kiosks unless directed otherwise by LEO or Gate staff. We catch you lane changing, and we send you back down one of the turnouts to the highway. Try again from the back of the line.

LoR

I would have no willcall at all, because I would move to electronic ticketing. Aside from no willcall it also means almost no ticket fraud. This is hardly new of course, most of the events I go to these days use electronic ticketing, and I believe in the future we'll see a lot more use of wireless electronic ticketing using smartphones in many venues. (I think you can do it over bluetooth, you don't need NFC which is still rare in phones.) There are variations of electronic ticketing which actually could push people to stay in their lanes, though for now I haven't seen anything that can do this, and traffic engineers have tried hard.

Another question you may know the answer to. If I wanted to do two different gates that were very distinctive -- one general, and the other express only for people during the first day with a special card who have done some basic training and have electronic tickets -- what would stand in the way of making a 2nd gate at one of the 12 mile entrances? I know that one of them has to stay open for the public to get to the playa road, but I know that a modest amount of BRC traffic does use this. What would you feel stands in the way of that? Yes, I know that some yahoos would ignore all the signs saying "Special electronic tickets only, if you don't have one you're going to be turned back and wait 3 more hours" but I think they could be managed.

Lord Of Ruin wrote:Can you cite an event that searches all vehicles, must take individual tickets, is a camping/living space event, and lets the participants choose their own space to set up in....and that does it all much better than BM?

No event has a situation quite like BM, I agree. (football stadium)

That said, (Great Smoky Mountains)

So to directly answer LOR's question: no, you cannot name any. Of course fill the reply with comparisons to non-equivalent, non-resembling events and places.

"The essence of tyranny is not iron law. It is capricious law." -- Christopher Hitchens

I did not assert there was an identical event. What I asserted is there are lots of large locations which process huge number of people and cars, and that they don't tolerate expected (rather than extraordinary) waits on the scale of the burning man gate. However, I do suspect that there are similar situations in Israel, and other countries where searching is more the norm. You don't find many large events in the USA where all cars are searched going in for a good reason. You do find large events where many 10s of thousands of people walking in are given cursory searches (sporting arenas) or more serious searches (Presidential appearances.)

However, my continued feeling is that not as much searching is needed. I believe that with the "find a stowaway, you all go home" policy that only minimal, random stowaway searches are needed. I do not believe that it is necessary to do more than randomly search a tiny fraction of vehicles of people who are experienced and have watched a video and taken an online quiz on the status of guns, pets, fireworks, plants, feathers, glitter and other moopies the week before their arrival. I believe that the primary thing that is necessary is to determine that the people in the vehicle have an appropriate ticket, and to do so in a way that provides a count of entrants within a reasonable margin of error, while conducting enough random searches with sufficient penalty on those who took the quiz that few who did it would do things that present a problem. I expect that some of those who did not go through such a procedure would continue to cause problems, and need more searches. I believe that some of them they would try to get in the wrong lane and otherwise disrupt their area of the gate. I expect that some would be problematic enough to require extra effort to get them to go to D-lot for full service gate.

I believe that for those who did train, their gate process could consist of approaching a gate worker who holds a tablet up to their barcode(s). The tablet shows the gate worker various messages such as "4 tickets plus 1 art car invite" or possibly adds beeps a bad sound and says "please send to secondary search" or "1 already used ticket." There are a number of other possible variations. The former type are waved through, the latter get a magnet with blinking LED stuck on their roof and are waved to secondary. Anybody who pulls off their magnet or doesn't go to secondary gets to meet pursuit or the cops.

One reason that having a true secondary rather than screening at the gate is the norm at most borders, airports etc, is that it vastly reduces the temptation to do things like change lanes and get out of vehicles. Because everybody is taking roughly the same amount of time, you do not find yourself behind the badly loaded truck that takes 10 minutes to search and wish you were in the next lane. Because movement is regular there is little opportunity to get out of the vehicle. It is slightly less fair to people needing secondary. To help there you want to primarily devote secondary crew to the random searches, and give uncertain waits only to those who did something to deserve their secondary.

There would be a difference between people who elected for a trained, faster set of gates and those who did not. People at the express gate who checked a box saying "I will make sure there are no dogs with us" and bring a dog will find a stiffer penalty than those who bring a dog to an ordinary gate. There are many escalations of penalty, from paying extra cash if you don't have to return to civilization, to being sent back to Reno but being allowed to return after fixing the problem, to cash+Reno, to having some or all tickets in the vehicle nullified. The threat of the latter for the major offences (such as stowaways) is very strong. It's a rare person who has put a lot of planning into their burn who will risk it. (And the vehicles with space to hide stowaways such as RVs, trucks and trailers, if packed full of stuff, are with people who put a lot into their trip.) If you want to spend money, you can also use the heartbeat detectors, CO2 concentration detectors and thermal cameras used by borders where smuggling of people is common. While they are far from clairvoyant, they are scary enough to deter most burners from giving it a try if the penalties are high. They're most effective when stowaways have had to be in their hidey-hole for a long time due to gate waits (Dogs are also used but the playa is not a great place for them.)

bradtem wrote:I did not assert there was an identical event. What I asserted is there are lots of large locations which process huge number of people and cars, and that they don't tolerate expected (rather than extraordinary) waits on the scale of the burning man gate. However, I do suspect that there are similar situations in Israel, and other countries where searching is more the norm. You don't find many large events in the USA where all cars are searched going in for a good reason. You do find large events where many 10s of thousands of people walking in are given cursory searches (sporting arenas) or more serious searches (Presidential appearances.)

RIght. But respectfully you keep citing instances when ONE of their characteristics fits your variable. It's the collection of variables that make it tough; searching all cars, requiring individual tickets, limited road volume, the ability for participants to park themselves and take time doing it. Did you know there are times during opening weekend where we SLOW DOWN Gate processing because it's backing up too far from Greeters? Did you know that there are times when we slow down processing at Gate becuase it's backing up TO Greeters from the city entrance streets...I..e the city isn't swallowing newcomers fast enough? Betcha didn't. Piont is that entry processing is a multi-level thing.

bradtem wrote:However, my continued feeling is that not as much searching is needed. I believe that with the "find a stowaway, you all go home" policy that only minimal, random stowaway searches are needed. I do not believe that it is necessary to do more than randomly search a tiny fraction of vehicles of people who are experienced and have watched a video and taken an online quiz on the status of guns, pets, fireworks, plants, feathers, glitter and other moopies the week before their arrival. I believe that the primary thing that is necessary is to determine that the people in the vehicle have an appropriate ticket, and to do so in a way that provides a count of entrants within a reasonable margin of error, while conducting enough random searches with sufficient penalty on those who took the quiz that few who did it would do things that present a problem. I expect that some of those who did not go through such a procedure would continue to cause problems, and need more searches. I believe that some of them they would try to get in the wrong lane and otherwise disrupt their area of the gate. I expect that some would be problematic enough to require extra effort to get them to go to D-lot for full service gate.

Again, you're simply talking about moving the problem around a whole lot. Making DLot bigger because more are sent there. DLot staffing is already problematic at times; it's where some of the most experienced Gate people end up working due to the needs of that function. Also, you would definately solve thge gate issue for some subset of Express pass holders. But at what benefit and cost to the whole. That's the rub....I have to say that in my Gate experience, you have a far, far too optimistic outlook on how well even the most prepared people will behave. We have Org-level managers that do it wrong every year. What does that say about the ability to "inform people and they'll do the right thing?" For that matter, the "right way" to behave in the Gate line has been around for what...ummm....10+ years? Your stipulation is "yea..but people didn't read that/forgot it. Let's make a funny radio station to get them to listen!" Fuck. That. See radical self-reliance. We're not even talking marginal self reliance here and people still can't do it.

bradtem wrote:I believe that for those who did train, their gate process could consist of approaching a gate worker who holds a tablet up to their barcode(s). The tablet shows the gate worker various messages such as "4 tickets plus 1 art car invite" or possibly adds beeps a bad sound and says "please send to secondary search" or "1 already used ticket." There are a number of other possible variations. The former type are waved through, the latter get a magnet with blinking LED stuck on their roof and are waved to secondary. Anybody who pulls off their magnet or doesn't go to secondary gets to meet pursuit or the cops.

If you bring some of these tablets (we'll probably need 6 or so of them for a lane to work. You need tech spares like nobody's business out there) and I can probably facilitate a test run of this for you with a subset of users.

bradtem wrote:One reason that having a true secondary rather than screening at the gate is the norm at most borders, airports etc, is that it vastly reduces the temptation to do things like change lanes and get out of vehicles. Because everybody is taking roughly the same amount of time, you do not find yourself behind the badly loaded truck that takes 10 minutes to search and wish you were in the next lane. Because movement is regular there is little opportunity to get out of the vehicle. It is slightly less fair to people needing secondary. To help there you want to primarily devote secondary crew to the random searches, and give uncertain waits only to those who did something to deserve their secondary.

Makes no sense at all. First you say that you're removing the delay agent (the searches) which would prevent people lane hopping and getting out of their cars. Then you put it right back in with your "teams of roving searchers" concept. Again, you're lack of Gate is showing here. You just don't "get" the behavior out there.

bradtem wrote:There would be a difference between people who elected for a trained, faster set of gates and those who did not. People at the express gate who checked a box saying "I will make sure there are no dogs with us" and bring a dog will find a stiffer penalty than those who bring a dog to an ordinary gate. There are many escalations of penalty, from paying extra cash if you don't have to return to civilization, to being sent back to Reno but being allowed to return after fixing the problem, to cash+Reno, to having some or all tickets in the vehicle nullified. The threat of the latter for the major offences (such as stowaways) is very strong. It's a rare person who has put a lot of planning into their burn who will risk it. (And the vehicles with space to hide stowaways such as RVs, trucks and trailers, if packed full of stuff, are with people who put a lot into their trip.)

I'm not sure what you do for a living, but you do not have a proper grasp of the participant economics of BM at all. Your penalties would have to be incredible for nearly every infraction; entire car's tickets are invalidated for any infraction (because anything other than that slows the line down...and bam, you're back at the slowdown, now at a second gate.

bradtem wrote: If you want to spend money, you can also use the heartbeat detectors, CO2 concentration detectors and thermal cameras used by borders where smuggling of people is common. While they are far from clairvoyant, they are scary enough to deter most burners from giving it a try if the penalties are high. They're most effective when stowaways have had to be in their hidey-hole for a long time due to gate waits (Dogs are also used but the playa is not a great place for them.)

Well, culturally there's a limit to how "big brother" the org has wanted to go. Some technologies have been tried. Most didn't lend significant enough benefit to warrant buying more. Also...there's that whole money thing. As in, where does the budget for this mythical equipment come from? Don't say "the Org will buy it"...'cause they won't.

To your earlier question about a second gate; I offer a partial answer. You're looking at staffing it. During peak times (which is when you'd probably operate this) you're looking at probably another 1/4 personnel needed from the main gate. Plus buildout of physical gates/lanes. I have no idea what the BLM would think of it.

But think of this: this process has been going on for a long time. Both BLM and Nevada HP, as well as Washoe LEO are VERY interested in keeping that highway clear and moving. Your ideas about searching and bulk ticket ideas have surely been raised before (theme camp tickets/wristbands anyone?). It's an incredibly simple fix that takes no technology and a simple word to Gate: dont' search. Why haven't they allowed us to? You assert that "new people in the BLM feel differently about it." Please make sure whoever you know at the Org knows this as they'r still negotiating the new permit. If they don't already know it, it'd be invaluable to know.

Staffing Gate is an incredible challenge every year; wrangling 350+ people to work for a month around the clock 2 miles away from one of the biggest party on Earth ain't easy. It takes people with a special masochistic streak. BM tends to attract people that generally don't have that streak.

Your electronic ticket idea is a good one, except for one thing: no solution will ever be allowed 100%. So you'd have to have a way to have a workaround for when people don't have a phone (there are lots of off the grid people at BM, ya know?), etc. And to go to that, you'd have to have technology (int he form of mobile scanners) which cost money for what....shortening someone's stay in line?

LoR

The fox provides for himself, but God provides for the lion - W. Blake (attribution corrected)

It's not so much a proposal to make D lot bigger or need more staff. (In fact it means fewer staff.) It just means, like most other security checkpoints, you split the most basic screening from the regular secondary screening. The people in the car lines never do more than either wave cars through or send them to secondary screening. (Which may not be D lot, it is not unreasonable to have 2 levels of secondary, one for the folks picked for random screening and one for the folks picked because they have a reason for screening.) There are reasons this is common because occasional long delays in primary screening lines are what cause people to switch lanes, get frustrated etc. One of my bad experiences at gate involved a pair of 2 vehicles that had a problem, I suspect somebody without a ticket, and they could not deal with it, and argued for a while, then cried and hugged and did teared goodbyes while one of the cars headed back to Reno and they switched who was there. Took about 25 minutes. They were right in front of me. You can bet I was itching to do all the things that gum stuff up, change lanes, get out, find out what's happening etc. Not having done that, I don't know if the gate crew were begging them to go to D lot, it did not appear to be the case. Of course some people will resist that order so you do need an ability to be firm, "You can go to secondary right now or we can get a tow truck to impound your car if you like."

The radio suggestion is one suggestion, but I think the main thing is to offer people a combination privilege and duty that go together. "Want to go in the fast lane? You had better know the procedure, better show us you know the procedure, and better realize if you don't do the basics you're going to be treated more harshly than if you hadn't asked for the privilege of the fast lane." I believe that makes people pay attention.

Having built a lot of tech on the playa, I do know how it fails, though smartphones and tablets tend to be fairly robust, and they worked well for DMV last year which was all iPad based. With fast screening of e-tickets and no searches-in-line you don't need as many per line. Not that it isn't great to do 4 cars in parallel in the line if you have the volunteers and the budget, but if each single gate person can scan, count and decide on wave-through vs. secondary in a more modest time, you don't need it.

How many go through secondary will be a function of the back-up and the number of people working there. When the load is heavy, the shift manager would tune the frequency of secondaries. Yes, that means if you want to sneak in a stowaway the best time is the peak load time -- but frankly that just adds to the cost of it in people's minds.

I don't plan for teams of roving searchers. If you are marked for secondary they slap a blinky magnet flag on your car and tell you turn left and get in that line over there. If somebody departs with the flag on their car and doesn't get in the secondary line they meet intercept and eventually the police. No searching in the line.

I think there are many penalties that can be managed (all meted out in secondary.) Stupid taxes of any amount can be charged in a small office. (No will call.) Just as today, anything that means a party in the car can't be admitted means a trip to Reno, which is a big penalty, but that's already the case officially, though I know that in special situations miracles do get offered. None of this slows the lines down, though it slows secondary down. I think entire-car-ticket-confiscation is a very extreme penalty. It would always be reserved for people who go crazy, but normally I would leave it only for deceit. Personally, I would even, at the entrance to secondary say, "Ok, we're going to search you. If we find you're deliberately hiding people or contraband on our list, you're all not going to Burning Man this year. If you tell us now, we might do <x>. Though you can't make a reliable pattern of it since you don't want the math to say, as it used to, that it was worth trying to sneak in. (The old math was that sneak in had an X% chance of free entry, and 100-X% chance of gate price+stupid tax, while just buying a ticket cost gate price. As long as X was high enough and the stupid tax low enough, it could be the rational thing to try. This is no longer the case.)

Actually, the reason for the equipment is mostly to alter the math above. In fact, you could even overtly say, "In our 5 screening stations, we have 2 real detectors and 3 fake ones, plus human searching. Want to take the gamble you'll get a line with a fake one?" Though usually you just hide the fact you have fake ones, and then people just have to make their bet on the rumour that they are fake. As for what would pay for the real ones, I had proposed a fee to go in a premium lane. This is how it works in airports, except the airline pays the fee to buy more security gear and lanes for their elite passengers. The TSA allows and encourages this because it's a win for everybody -- the elite flyers got a quick line and the regular flyers got a faster line because the elites were diverted to the line they paid for. Burning Man doesn't pay most of the people working at it but it does offer free tickets, commissary and more to reward volunteers.

Obviously a 2nd gate would take costs and effort and staff. That in turn depends on how many people would say yes to the question of "Would you pay $X to get a special pass to an express lane on Monday with likely wait time less than Y, with the further provision that if you're caught cheating in the random searches there, you will face a stiffer penalty, including all the up to all of you not going to Burning Man this year?" I think a lot of people would say yes, even if those who say they love the line might not. Especially since smoother access means better camp placement. As a per car price, it would also encourage carpooling. Would a car with 3 people not happily add $15/person on to their $250 ticket to get in 2-3 hours sooner? That's less than minimum wage. 1,000 cars paying $50 would pay for a fair bit of extra sources.

BTW, I didn't say the new BLM management wants to do this. Rather it's the old management I have talked to, and I was adding the caveat that I don't know about the new crew. As for why BM Org management decides against it, I will ask them. The permit and operating plan do not require search. That doesn't mean there aren't more subtle, not-in-the-permit pressures from BLM to BRCLLC pushing for search that are not made public, but from an official standpoint, the permit and operating plan say very little about how gate should be run. (Essentially: Put up signs saying what's banned, count the population every day at noon, give the BLM a cut of the receipts.)

Electronic tickets have many advantages which is why they are becoming common at many venues. Electronic tickets don't require a phone. Their most basic form is just a paper with a bar code, and ticket-takers scan the bar codes. Full electronic processing is less common (though of course the norm at toll booths nowadays.) You can still take paper tickets of course.

But they have huge advantages beyond shortening lines. No need for a will-call (especially if you say that late ticket buyers must print or otherwise get an e-ticket.) Secure ticket transfer among burners, no risk of fraudulent tickets (other than due to fraud by staff with access to the ticket creation engine.) Done right, each ticket scanner can operate independently, though they do sync up via a wireless link to mark tickets as used. (If the local network goes down, you may have a short time when well-timed cheaters could get in on the same ticket in two lanes, but they take a fair bit of risk.)

I think the actual result is you can run gate with fewer people, and in fact you can tune the frequency of searches to match the number of volunteers you have. One of my earlier suggestions was a means to have a huge supply of volunteers, but the feedback was that making use of short-term volunteers, no matter how trained, was too risky.

(I recommend that those who are bored by this or think the plans ridiculous simply refrain from reading this thread. I can't imagine why you wish to read it and post messages that contribute nothing except expression of your frustration if it bothers you so.)

(I recommend that those who are bored by this or think the plans ridiculous simply refrain from reading this thread. I can't imagine why you wish to read it and post messages that contribute nothing except expression of your frustration if it bothers you so.)

What? And miss this scintillating dialogue? I think NOT! I'm in it to the bitter end.

Naive beliefs in "technology" and better ways, but no references to any (Israel's policies?).

Diluting "solutions" to their effective original problem state when holes are pointed out ("we should not have searches, but okay we'll still have them.")

Concentrating on "solutions" which have little no effect on the overall problem (e.g. radio stations, electronic tickets, express lanes)

Solutions that rely on fundamentally compromising the operations of the gate (no searches, car tickets).

I'll sum up your entire argument and cut out the fluff:

Finding stowaways or contraband, collecting tickets directly, or anything that would otherwise sacrifice traffic throughput is a grievance that is intolerable. You want to cut the line wait by effectively removing the gate.

Anything more to this? I don't think so.

"The essence of tyranny is not iron law. It is capricious law." -- Christopher Hitchens

Naive beliefs in "technology" and better ways, but no references to any (Israel's policies?).

Diluting "solutions" to their effective original problem state when holes are pointed out ("we should not have searches, but okay we'll still have them.")

Concentrating on "solutions" which have little no effect on the overall problem (e.g. radio stations, electronic tickets, express lanes)

Solutions that rely on fundamentally compromising the operations of the gate (no searches, car tickets).

I'll sum up your entire argument and cut out the fluff:

Finding stowaways or contraband, collecting tickets directly, or anything that would otherwise sacrifice traffic throughput is a grievance that is intolerable. You want to cut the line wait by effectively removing the gate.

Anything more to this? I don't think so.

The air is crackling with excitement as we await Brad's reply. And make no mistake.....THERE WILL BE A REPLY!!!!!!!!!

Lord Of Ruin wrote:Staffing Gate is an incredible challenge every year; wrangling 350+ people to work for a month around the clock 2 miles away from one of the biggest party on Earth ain't easy. It takes people with a special masochistic streak. BM tends to attract people that generally don't have that streak.

As in anyone who can stand reading a glut of superfluous language with rapid change logic from an insufferable know it all? If you have read all of these posts you may just be one of those special people with a masochistic streak!

Lord Of Ruin wrote:Staffing Gate is an incredible challenge every year; wrangling 350+ people to work for a month around the clock 2 miles away from one of the biggest party on Earth ain't easy. It takes people with a special masochistic streak. BM tends to attract people that generally don't have that streak.

As in anyone who can stand reading a glut of superfluous language with rapid change logic from an insufferable know it all? If you have read all of these posts you may just be one of those special people with a masochistic streak!

Oh crap, I've plonked bradtemper. I guess that even my knowing ygmir and Evil Chris won't be enough to get me an in a GP@E.

The Lady with a Lamprey

"The powerful are exploiting people, art and ideas, and this leads to us plebes debating how to best ration ice.Man, no wonder they always win....." Lonesomebri

theCryptofishist wrote:Oh crap, I've plonked bradtemper. I guess that even my knowing ygmir and Evil Chris won't be enough to get me an in a GP@E.

Fishy's on a plonking binge!!

I kinda like being on her plonkee list.. I can tip toe around her and make cute little bunny ears and she'll neeeeeeeeeever know I'm here..

Although.. reading someone's thread and then plonking the OP just so you can come back in and comment but only read half the thread..seems a little.. uh.. (no comment). Then again, I don't get the whole thing with plonking.. but then again.. (and this is where I smile and nod and stop)